Sure looks that way!

In spite of this YouTuber's histrionics, it does seem very fucked up to have your previous years worth of stored information on DnD Beyond gets forcibly updated to the latest DnD hotness and thus completely screwed up any games in progress. Once again, I'm happy that I didn't jump on the bandwagon for this.

They ended up backpeddaling and reversing course eventually. Which in some ways is worse, because it means we know they were flat out LYING when they said it would be too complicated to make a tab that would let you switch between the two different sets of rules.

Honestly if they were really smart they would have the rules for EVERY edition of D&D available on the site. At least the three core books for each edition.

That would probably get them even more subscribers, but WotC/Hasbro has shown they're not the brightest.

Quote from: Orphan81 on September 03, 2024, 12:48:13 PMThey ended up backpeddaling and reversing course eventually. Which in some ways is worse, because it means we know they were flat out LYING when they said it would be too complicated to make a tab that would let you switch between the two different sets of rules.

Honestly if they were really smart they would have the rules for EVERY edition of D&D available on the site. At least the three core books for each edition.

That would probably get them even more subscribers, but WotC/Hasbro has shown they're not the brightest.

What gets me about this is the attitude of WotC towards its customers. Of course a current DnD Beyond subscriber doesn't want their data for a current game or campaign scrambled by a rules update they may or may not use. WotC never gave them a choice or even the illusion of one, they just assumed that the customers were locked in and would just go along with it no matter how bad it was. To me it shows a lot of disrespect for the customers.

Quote from: jeff37923 on September 03, 2024, 01:39:19 PMWhat gets me about this is the attitude of WotC towards its customers. Of course a current DnD Beyond subscriber doesn't want their data for a current game or campaign scrambled by a rules update they may or may not use. WotC never gave them a choice or even the illusion of one, they just assumed that the customers were locked in and would just go along with it no matter how bad it was. To me it shows a lot of disrespect for the customers.

The last two years have shown the complete disregard they have for their customers. The only people who are staying with them at this point are the ones that think the D&D 'Brand Name' is what dictates what a real roleplaying game is.

That and because 5th edition is an easy player facing system. Those two aspects combined are why we have the battered spouses of WotC that stick with them no matter what the company does.

The Good thing is, there are lots of players who finally woke up and abandoned ship to try something else.

This is classic behavior, on the part of WOTC.  They simply must find a way, to do the wrong thing.  It's in their DNA.

Quote from: Man at Arms on September 03, 2024, 02:12:21 PMThis is classic behavior, on the part of WOTC.  They simply must find a way, to do the wrong thing.  It's in their DNA.

YEP!

WOTC CEO:  We need to do this to make more money.  Is this totally stupid?
WOTC Employee:  Yes, it is and it will piss people off.
WOTC CEO:  Lets do this immediately then.

Quote from: jeff37923 on September 03, 2024, 01:39:19 PMTo me it shows a lot of disrespect for the customers.

wotc has increasingly shown they have zero respect for the customers. Their once very good customer service is now a mess where people have to practically strongarm wotc to get any help, and the company's overall Games Workshop level of treatment of the players.

Quote from: Orphan81 on September 03, 2024, 12:48:13 PMThey ended up backpeddaling and reversing course eventually. Which in some ways is worse, because it means we know they were flat out LYING when they said it would be too complicated to make a tab that would let you switch between the two different sets of rules.

Honestly if they were really smart they would have the rules for EVERY edition of D&D available on the site. At least the three core books for each edition.

That would probably get them even more subscribers, but WotC/Hasbro has shown they're not the brightest.

DnDBeyond had originally said that they would fully support 2014 rules. They then had an update where they said they'd only support 2014 races, classes, and class options - but not 2014 spells and equipment. After backlash, they then backpedaled into saying they'd support 2014 spells and equipment. I suspect that this was a cost-cutting screw-up where some manager wasn't given enough programmer man-hours to do the whole thing, and some middle management thought that would be good enough.

---

It would be nice for players to switch between editions. However, my understanding is that in RPGs as a business, the network effect is extremely strong. If players can easily go from one game to the other without major change, then the whole network gets stronger and easier to grow.

One of the reasons cited for why TSR went bankrupt in the 1990s was that they were effectively breaking apart their own network by simultaneously supporting two editions (BECMI and AD&D) and a dozen or more divergent settings. Their audience was getting smaller and smaller for each book published. Compared to TSR, WotC has been far more successful in promoting core D&D - particularly over the past ten years, during which D&D has been more popular than ever.

So this compatibility backpedal seems like a screwup, but overall, I suspect they're better off as a business focusing on their current edition.

Quote from: Orphan81 on September 03, 2024, 12:48:13 PMHonestly if they were really smart they would have the rules for EVERY edition of D&D available on the site. At least the three core books for each edition.

This. Look at Kalmbach Publishing (lots of hobby magazines): you subscribe to Model Railroader and you get archive access to all prior issues.  Same for Train, Classic Trains, etc.

Subscribe to their all the railroad (prototype and model) magazines and you get access to all for the price of about 2.

Make each edition a subscription and then if you sub to all you get a discount and get more than just core books. It's all digitized already.  Sure, it might take time to get everything in the VTT but $180/yr (that's what KP's competitor White River Publishing gets for their deal and they don't have all back issues digitized) spread across not just those 5e players who came along but 4e players (bit of a revival for that edition for some reason).

You'd probably get some PF players, especially ones who stuck to 1e instead of going to PF2, and might get some OSR types.

How would that be for monetization you damn fools.

Quote from: jhkim on September 03, 2024, 04:11:22 PMSo this compatibility backpedal seems like a screwup, but overall, I suspect they're better off as a business focusing on their current edition.

One of the key selling points of the new D&D is complete backwards compatibility with 5th edition. The "Equipment" you mention also includes magic items, the end result would have required hundreds of 'home brew' entries to replace all of the content that was being cut. It was being implemented with no warning, and to the potentially millions of character that were already made on D&D Beyond.

The whole point of D&D Beyond, it's whole selling point is to automate your character sheet and aspects of the game, to be convenient for use. Making it easier to go and use roll20 or Fantasy Grounds instead would be bad buisness.

Again particularly since the selling point of the new edition is "Backwards Compatibility"

But Jhkim never misses an opportunity where he can come in to be a contrarian. I'm starting to believe you have a personality disorder that makes you attempt to play Devil's advocate in every single thread you read.

Quote from: Orphan81 on September 03, 2024, 05:51:23 PM

Quote from: jhkim on September 03, 2024, 04:11:22 PMSo this compatibility backpedal seems like a screwup, but overall, I suspect they're better off as a business focusing on their current edition.

But Jhkim never misses an opportunity where he can come in to be a contrarian. I'm starting to believe you have a personality disorder that makes you attempt to play Devil's advocate in every single thread you read.

I've always found Jhkim bewildering.

Didn't finish the video, but I got a laugh when she said it was a scary time for all roleplayers. ...Fuckin' why? Is she seriously unaware that a lot of us stand to benefit from WOTC's failures?

Quote from: jhkim on September 03, 2024, 04:11:22 PMOne of the reasons cited for why TSR went bankrupt in the 1990s was that they were effectively breaking apart their own network by simultaneously supporting two editions (BECMI and AD&D) and a dozen or more divergent settings. Their audience was getting smaller and smaller for each book published. Compared to TSR, WotC has been far more successful in promoting core D&D - particularly over the past ten years, during which D&D has been more popular than ever.

Wouldn't the obvious counterexample there be the 4th edition fiasco, and Pathfinder getting to eat WOTC's lunch almost entirely on the promise of continuing support for the previous edition of D&D? Isn't that the entire reason WOTC went out of their way to promise that new D&D would be compatible with 5th edition?

I actually had a discussion about something like this with my younger daughter (16 yo) last week.

It started from a 'why I do not play the current D&D and will not EVER go to the computer based D&D

I explained it to her like a true/pure capitalist system, a business makes mouse traps. It's job is to make money by making the best mouse trap it can, and marketing that it is the best mouse trap. People that need a mouse trap buy it and the company makes the needed profit (to pay the workers they supply the owner etc). However, in a  corporate set up the corporate owns A LOT of companies and it's job it to make the highest profit it can for the corporation and stock holders etc.  It has nothing to do with 'make the best and market it' it is 100% short easy profit decisions. So a company that saves a 5 cents on each mouse trap, and produces a cheap breakable less effective mouse trap, but sells 100k of them makes $5k profit. Now on top of that D&D going to a computer based game means everyone has to buy the computer access (instead of the DM getting the books and players needing only the player book etc) then if you want a special race/class/equipment then pay extra for it, and then if your players wants it on their character then they have to pay extra to. That helped her understand it.

However, we got home from the drive running errands so I didn't get to answer her 'So why do people put up with it and shouldn't they just stop playing it and get other games like we play C&C/Traveller/CoC-DG ...

Quote from: ForgottenF on September 03, 2024, 10:05:42 PM

Quote from: jhkim on September 03, 2024, 04:11:22 PMOne of the reasons cited for why TSR went bankrupt in the 1990s was that they were effectively breaking apart their own network by simultaneously supporting two editions (BECMI and AD&D) and a dozen or more divergent settings. Their audience was getting smaller and smaller for each book published. Compared to TSR, WotC has been far more successful in promoting core D&D - particularly over the past ten years, during which D&D has been more popular than ever.

Wouldn't the obvious counterexample there be the 4th edition fiasco, and Pathfinder getting to eat WOTC's lunch almost entirely on the promise of continuing support for the previous edition of D&D? Isn't that the entire reason WOTC went out of their way to promise that new D&D would be compatible with 5th edition?

I'm not saying that any backwards compatibility is a bad move. Previously, 2E and (to some degree) 3.5E along with the current new edition all promised backwards compatibility with the immediately prior edition -- and it seems like a reasonable decision. However, that doesn't mean that supporting more editions is always better - as the prior post argued.

It sounds on the surface plausible that if a company supports more systems, they'll be more successful because they'll get more players. However, the history of RPG sales goes against it. Currently in 2024, tabletop RPGs are more successful than ever, and they're also hugely dominated by D&D. The success of Pathfinder and Starfinder are clearly from tapping into the D&D network, not that they are better game design than all others.

I'm not advocating for the overwhelming focus of the market on current-edition D&D. I'd love it if there were more variety - not just more D&D editions, but other games as well. However, I have to admit that the network effect exists, and that WotC is profiting by it.

---

Quote from: Lurker on September 03, 2024, 11:19:31 PMI explained it to her like a true/pure capitalist system, a business makes mouse traps. It's job is to make money by making the best mouse trap it can, and marketing that it is the best mouse trap. People that need a mouse trap buy it and the company makes the needed profit (to pay the workers they supply the owner etc). However, in a  corporate set up the corporate owns A LOT of companies and it's job it to make the highest profit it can for the corporation and stock holders etc.  It has nothing to do with 'make the best and market it' it is 100% short easy profit decisions. So a company that saves a 5 cents on each mouse trap, and produces a cheap breakable less effective mouse trap, but sells 100k of them makes $5k profit.

Tons of small businesses are fly-by-night operations that are even more focused on short easy profit than big corporations. They'll have Kickstarters that fail to deliver anything, say, or not pay their partners and artists.

I'm not a fan of big corporations, but I also don't think it's as simple as saying that the guy on the corner is good and trustworthy and that big corporations are evil and short-term-profiteer.